¼ÒÃÄË¡¿Í¡¡ÊªÍýõºº³Ø²ñ
Âè120²ó(Ê¿À®21ǯÅÙ½Õµ¨)³Ø½Ñ¹Ö±é²ñ


¹â¼¡¥â¡¼¥É¤ò´Þ¤àÈùÆ°¥Ç¡¼¥¿¤ËÂФ¹¤ëSPACË¡¤Î¸¡Æ¤

¹Ö±éÍ×»Ý(ÏÂʸ)
½¾Íè¡¢ÈùÆ°¤Ï´ðËܥ⡼¥É¤¬Âî±Û¤¹¤ë¤È¤·¤Æ²òÀϤµ¤ì¤Æ¤­¤¿¡£¤·¤«¤·¡¢¶áǯ¡¢ÈùÆ°¤Ë´Þ¤Þ¤ì¤ë¹â¼¡¥â¡¼¥É¤Î±Æ¶Á¤¬Ìµ»ë¤Ç¤­¤º¡¢SPACË¡¤Ë¤ª¤¤¤Æ¹â¼¡¥â¡¼¥É¤ò¹Íθ¤·¤¿²òÀϼêË¡¤¬¸¡Æ¤¤µ¤ì¤Æ¤¤¤ë¡£Ëܸ¦µæ¤Ç¤Ï¡¢SPACË¡¤Ë¤è¤ê¿äÄꤵ¤ì¤ë°ÌÁê®ÅÙ¤ò­¡³Æ¼þÇÈ¿ô¤Ë¤ª¤¤¤ÆºÇÂ翶Éý¤ò»ý¤Ä¥â¡¼¥É¤Î°ÌÁê®Å٤Ȥ¹¤ëÊýË¡¡¢­¢³Æ¥â¡¼¥É¤Î°ÌÁê®ÅÙ¤ò¿¶Éý¤Ç½Å¤ßÉÕ¤±¤·¤¿°ÌÁê®Å٤Ȥ¹¤ëÊýË¡¤Î2¤Ä¤Ë¤ª¤¤¤Æ¥·¥ß¥å¥ì¡¼¥·¥ç¥ó¤È¥¤¥ó¥Ð¡¼¥¸¥ç¥ó¤«¤é¸¡Æ¤¤ò¹Ô¤Ã¤¿¡£¤Þ¤º¹â¼¡¥â¡¼¥É¤¬Âî±Û¤¹¤ë¹½Â¤¤ËÂФ·¡¢DWI¤Ë¤è¤êÈùÆ°¥Ç¡¼¥¿ºîÀ®¤·¡¢SPACË¡¤òŬÍѤ·¤¿¡£¿äÄꤵ¤ì¤¿°ÌÁê®Å٤ϸ«¤«¤±°ÌÁê®ÅÙ¤òÍѤ¤¤ë¼êË¡­¢¤ÈÀ°¹çŪ¤Ç¤¢¤Ã¤¿¡£¤µ¤é¤Ë°äÅÁŪ¥¢¥ë¥´¥ê¥º¥à¤òÍѤ¤¤Æ¹Ô¤Ã¤¿¥¤¥ó¥Ð¡¼¥¸¥ç¥ó·ë²Ì¤â¼êË¡­¢¤ò»Ù»ý¤·¤¿¡£

¹Ö±éÍ×»Ý(±Ñʸ)
Recent studies demonstrated that higher modes cannot be ignored in SPAC method, although we usually analyzed microtremor only considering a fundamental mode. Therefore microtremor analysis methods considering higher modes have been suggested. Here, we reviewed two analysis methods considering higher modes by numerical simulation and inversion. Method 1 is to consider the observed phase velocity as phase velocity of the mode with maximum amplitude. Whereas, in method 2, we calculate the apparent phase velocity from phase velocity and amplitude of each mode. To compare these methods, we simulated microtremor, using DWI. When we use method 2, the observed dispersion curve is consistent with theoretical dispersion. Moreover, we inverted S-wave velocity structure by genetic algorithm and obtained consistent structure using method 2.